Adam Fox, Cale Makar or Miro Heiskanen?

[notDatsyuk]

Only reason Fox won it last year was cause he played 11 more games in a shortened season than Makar.

Not true. He also feasted on some pretty crappy defensive teams for most of his points.

 

[wintersej]

And yet you still concluded that Makar has the most to give and Fox the least. Seems like flashy offensive skills is all this is about. If McAvoy has similar puck skills, why hasn’t he ever scored at a similar rate to Fox? They’ve been playing on the same teams back to their days in Long Island.

McAvoy had one fewer 5 on 5 point than Fox and played in fewer games. He just wasn't on PP1 in Boston. This year he is.

 

[Regal]

McAvoy had one fewer 5 on 5 point than Fox and played in fewer games. He just wasn't on PP1 in Boston. This year he is.

While opportunity needs to be taken into account when comparing players, just because McAvoy will get better deployment doesn’t mean he’ll come close to matching Fox, who was one of the most productive and efficient PP players, let alone defensemen in the game last year, and had incredible underlying PP numbers which suggested he was a big part of his PP’s success. So far, in McAvoy’s limited PP minutes in his career, he hasn’t shown to be a big positive.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Not true. He also feasted on some pretty crappy defensive teams for most of his points.

Very rich to hear how the guy that played the toughest schedule of all those in contention for the award last season feasted on crappy defenses.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

McAvoy had one fewer 5 on 5 point than Fox and played in fewer games. He just wasn't on PP1 in Boston. This year he is.

I’m not talking about only last season. I think my post made that very clear.

I’m not anti-McAvoy either. I think he’s at worst the fourth best defenseman in the league. I’m just not sure how Fox is somehow discredited by so many. Fox literally won the Norris trophy. He doesn’t need to be better than last season to not be the worst of those players because it’s highly likely three defenseman, let alone those three specific ones, reach the level he established last season at once.

 

[Voight]

Hockey fans and media likes to anoint players to certain titles before they accomplish it. They should’ve learned their lesson with Hart. How is Makar so universally viewed as the best defenseman in the NHL? Is Fox not the same age with an actual Norris? You could also certainly argue that Hedman, Josi or another veteran 1D is better.

Hart is a bad comparison... Makar was already one of the best d-men in the league as a rookie and followed that up with a 2nd place Norris finish.

Makar is viewed was better because its almost widely accepted he would have won the Norris had he not missed 12 games.

 

[PAZ]

There’s no games played requirement. Seems like Fox was simply better. It’s not like the vote was that close either.

There is no games played requirement, but it is still a factor. Rarely do you see a player missing 20%+ of the season win the Norris/Hart/Selke/etc. Do you honestly think Perry was a better player than Crosby in 2010/11 to win the Hart? No, but Perry had a career year and contributed throughout the whole season, whereas Crosby missed half of it.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Hart is a bad comparison... Makar was already one of the best d-men in the league as a rookie and followed that up with a 2nd place Norris finish.

Makar is viewed was better because its almost widely accepted he would have won the Norris had he not missed 12 games.

I made clear that it was not a one to one comparison. Makar was better than Hart, relative to his position. However, Makar is viewed as the undisputed best and Hart going into last season was viewed by many as a top five goalie, even though his accomplishments said otherwise. That’s my point. Makar is more accomplished than Hart was, but he’s being elevated without actually accomplishing that level of play.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

There is no games played requirement, but it is still a factor. Rarely do you see a player missing 20%+ of the season win the Norris/Hart/Selke/etc. Do you honestly think Perry was a better player than Crosby in 2010/11 to win the Hart? No, but Perry had a career year and contributed throughout the whole season, whereas Crosby missed half of it.

I guess it was a factor. I also guess that Hedman being injured was a factor. Every season there are different factors that contribute to who wins what awards. The point is that Makar being the best isn’t based on anything other than projection that he would’ve been given the Norris with some different circumstances and then scoring. Fair enough if that’s the argument that Makar is the best, but usually the guys known as the undisputed best can actually at least say they’ve accomplished the biggest accolades. So far Makar hasn’t, which is why I say he’s being elevated based on projection and hype, not substance. That’s not to say he isn’t a great player, but that’s a different discussion.

 

[5 14 6 1]

Makar

Heiskanen




Fox


Fox would never play in Edmonton (fact). Makar is from Alberta and Heiskanen is a Finn. They win by default lol.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Very rich to hear how the guy that played the toughest schedule of all those in contention for the award last season feasted on crappy defenses.

With a quick count:
Against the three worst teams, he had 2 goals and 29 assists, and was +22.
Against the three best teams, he had 1 goal and 8 assists, and was even.

 

[The Abusement Park]

I think it’s pretty clear that as on now the 2 best young dmen in the game are Makar and Fox. There’s potential for others to join their level but their on their own island at this point. But it his hilarious to see the insecurity that someone could be about as good as Fox.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

With a quick count:
Against the three worst teams, he had 2 goals and 29 assists, and was +22.
Against the three best teams, he had 1 goal and 8 assists, and was even.

Great cherry picking. There weren’t even six other teams in the division. It’s also funny to hear how doing good against the bad teams in a division is some bad thing. He played in the toughest division. Other players had easier schedules. Why didn’t they do better against bad teams?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I think it’s pretty clear that as on now the 2 best young dmen in the game are Makar and Fox. There’s potential for others to join their level but their on their own island at this point. But it his hilarious to see the insecurity that someone could be about as good as Fox.

If you think the issue thats been voiced by Rangers fans is that we object to Fox and Makar being viewed as about as good as each other, you are either being intentionally disingenuous or struggling with reading comprehension.

Makar has 35% more of the vote in this poll than Fox. He has way more than double the amount of votes as Fox. Fox has the same amount of votes as Heiskanen. There are people who have now inserted McAvoy into this discussion, and are saying Fox is the worst of those four because he has less to give. Clearly it's a different issue here than you've represented it as.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Great cherry picking. There weren’t even six other teams in the division. It’s also funny to hear how doing good against the bad teams in a division is some bad thing. He played in the toughest division. Other players had easier schedules. Why didn’t they do better against bad teams?

Against Buffalo and Philadelphia, the two worst defensive teams in the league, he average 1.5 PPG.

Against two of the four beat defensive teams in the league, he averaged 0.125 PPG.

Not sure why you think there weren't at least six other teams.

Not sure why you think the East was the toughest. Certainly not for scoring, as they had the highest average goals per team. He actually played in the easiest division to score in.

 

[The Abusement Park]

If you think the issue thats been voiced by Rangers fans is that we object to Fox and Makar being viewed as about as good as each other, you are either being intentionally disingenuous or struggling with reading comprehension.

Makar has 35% more of the vote in this poll than Fox. He has way more than double the amount of votes as Fox. Fox has the same amount of votes as Heiskanen. There are people who have now inserted McAvoy into this discussion, and are saying Fox is the worst of those four because he has less to give. Clearly it's a different issue here than you've represented it as.

I mean anytime Makar is talked about Rangers fans have to bring up Fox and his Norris. It goes both ways though. Avs fans do the same. Also it’s pretty clear by some of the posts here that the Fox stuff is trolling more than anything.

 

[Voight]

I made clear that it was not a one to one comparison. Makar was better than Hart, relative to his position. However, Makar is viewed as the undisputed best and Hart going into last season was viewed by many as a top five goalie, even though his accomplishments said otherwise. That’s my point. Makar is more accomplished than Hart was, but he’s being elevated without actually accomplishing that level of play.

Hart's hype was unwarranted. Makar's is.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Against Buffalo and Philadelphia, the two worst defensive teams in the league, he average 1.5 PPG.

Against two of the four beat defensive teams in the league, he averaged 0.125 PPG.

Not sure why you think there weren't at least six other teams.

Not sure why you think the East was the toughest. Certainly not for scoring, as they had the highest average goals per team. He actually played in the easiest division to score in.

I said there weren’t six teams, not that there weren’t at least six. There were seven, which is the point. You are cherry picking. And now you want to further cherry pick by making it stats against two teams. It’s even cherry picking to say Fox won the Norris due to points, as if that’s all he’s good at. Fox is better defensively than offensively.

Also most acknowledged the Eastern division was the toughest division. I’m not sure that’s a hot take.

 

[KevSkillz4]

Cale Makar is the type of D who can put 100 points one day. He is good like that.

 

[notDatsyuk]

I said there weren’t six teams, not that there weren’t at least six. There were seven, which is the point. You are cherry picking. And now you want to further cherry pick by making it stats against two teams. It’s even cherry picking to say Fox won the Norris due to points, as if that’s all he’s good at. Fox is better defensively than offensively.

Also most acknowledged the Eastern division was the toughest division. I’m not sure that’s a hot take.

Well you're the one who said "There weren’t even six other teams in the division."

I'm not sure why, if the subject is 'scoring most against the worse teams', you think comparing scoring against the worst teams to scoring against the best teams is 'cherry picking'. Should I have compared his scoring against the seven worst opponents with his scoring against the seven best? I guess that would have suited you better.

Since we're talking specifically about goals allowed, I don't see why you think the division that allowed the most was the hardest division to score against.

 

[GettingYourMoms]

Libor Hajek

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Well you're the one who said "There weren’t even six other teams in the division."

I'm not sure why, if the subject is 'scoring most against the worse teams', you think comparing scoring against the worst teams to scoring against the best teams is 'cherry picking'. Should I have compared his scoring against the seven worst opponents with his scoring against the seven best? I guess that would have suited you better.

Since we're talking specifically about goals allowed, I don't see why you think the division that allowed the most was the hardest division to score against.

I think we shouldn’t reduce everything to points. Fox’s game isn’t only about scoring.

In a league that has become about offense, I don’t know why the highest scoring division wouldn’t be the best.

 

[wintersej]

I’m not talking about only last season. I think my post made that very clear.

I’m not anti-McAvoy either. I think he’s at worst the fourth best defenseman in the league. I’m just not sure how Fox is somehow discredited by so many. Fox literally won the Norris trophy. He doesn’t need to be better than last season to not be the worst of those players because it’s highly likely three defenseman, let alone those three specific ones, reach the level he established last season at once.

You might be right! I just look at those four and see a Norris in all their futures. I’m not saying Fox will be Subban in the slightest, but one young age Norris doesn’t mean Fox is winning more Norris trophies either. He deserved the Norris he hit. I just think that Miri and McAvoy will get more points in coming years and close that gap.

 

[notDatsyuk]

I think we shouldn’t reduce everything to points. Fox’s game isn’t only about scoring.

In a league that has become about offense, I don’t know why the highest scoring division wouldn’t be the best.

I did mention that as one aspect, but you seemed to want to talk only about points, until you lost that part of the discussion.

Then, after saying we shouldn't reduce everything to points, you use just that to argue that the Metro is the best.

Why are you changing the discussion about the Metro from 'toughest to score in', which I have shown wasn't true, to 'best', which wasn't any part of the discussion at all?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I did mention that as one aspect, but you seemed to want to talk only about points, until you lost that part of the discussion.

Then, after saying we shouldn't reduce everything to points, you use just that to argue that the Metro is the best.

Why are you changing the discussion about the Metro from 'toughest to score in', which I have shown wasn't true, to 'best', which wasn't any part of the discussion at all?

How did I lose that part of the discussion? You are cherry picking and then you cherry picked your own cherry picking. Fox’s point totals more than beat Heiskanen and McAvoy. And they also beat Makar, if we go by total points. Someone can cherry pick a point to arrive at almost any conclusion, but that doesn’t mean they are right.

I’m pretty sure I never said toughest to score in. I said it’s the best division, and it should hypothetically be easier to score against worse competition. I’m not sure how you take that to mean that the best division can’t be the highest scoring division.